It seems that someone has decided to look at the Flat Earth books and literature that has been around for the last one hundred years. Aside from the fact that the model is not new at all -- the Bi-Polar model became an official model of the society in the early 1900's under the leadership of Lady Blount shortly after the discovery of the South Magnetic Pole -- its a nice presentation of the basic idea.

The Flat Earth Society of Lady Blount's time (then called the Universal Zetetic Society) didn't provide a map for the Bi-Polar model, however. It appears that he is using Sandokhan's layout, to which he rightfully deserves credit.

If the author did in fact come up with this on his own, he deserves a lot of credit, although it is hard to see how, since the exact same map comes up in Google Image Search when one searches for "Flat Earth Two Pole map" or if one reads our Wiki.

Still, whatever. The author deserves good congratulations on his work on this video. Hopefully it spreads around to the YouTube community. I am glad to see that word is being spread.

Give Tom a break. How is this low content whining of any interest to anyone? Where are your sources, where are your examples, where is your counter argument? Stop vampiring Tom's attention and make some effort in return. Tom wants to discuss the content. Either discuss it or leave his post last, so someone who does can respond.

HorstFue

Yes, it took me one glance at the picture: Look at the equator! How do you get from Ecuador to New Guinea on this "map"?

And the Sun?What is the path of the Sun at equinox? Going West over Africa, over South America, moving out to the Pacific and ... uuups, what's this? The map ends here.Or did the author forget to mention the wormholes at each side of the map? So that the Sun instantaneously reappears at the other side of the "map"?

That's a common problem with any Flat Earth model: If it's flat it must have some boundaries, borders, edges or similar (e.g. the ice wall). Those borders, edges do not exist on the surface of a sphere.

Yes, it took me one glance at the picture: Look at the equator! How do you get from Ecuador to New Guinea on this "map"?

The same way you get from LA to Japan on the Monopole model: Travel Westwards.

In the Bi-Polar Model there are two poles. The magnetic field lines resemble something like the field lines of a bar magnet. Essentially something like this, but in three dimensions:

The compass aligns itself with the field lines and adjusts itself when one travels Westwards or Eastwards in the Northern or Southern Hemiplane to go around either the North or South poles.

Since the magnetic field lines in magnets wrap around and interconnect, none traveling out into space in an unconnected fashion, traveling North or South at any point will also take you to either the North or South Pole.

This bipolar flat Earth model has at least one problem: the distance between a star in the "northern track" and one in the "southern track" would decrease until the middle of the night, and increase from that point (until local noon, but daylight invalidates such observations). From someone at the equator, constellations overhead would appear to converge into a smaller shape until midnight, and then "explode" as they pass above them.

Such shape changes would frustrate ancient astronomy (and especially astrology), and would have serious implications for nautical navigation at night. No such distance changes have ever been observed.

Having said that, it solves some AE problems, and possibly has fewer problems than any other FE model.

I am not here to convert you. I want to know enough to be able to defend the RE model.

This bipolar flat Earth model has at least one problem: the distance between a star in the "northern track" and one in the "southern track" would decrease until the middle of the night, and increase from that point (until local noon, but daylight invalidates such observations). From someone at the equator, constellations overhead would appear to converge into a smaller shape until midnight, and then "explode" as they pass above them.

Such shape changes would frustrate ancient astronomy (and especially astrology), and would have serious implications for nautical navigation at night. No such distance changes have ever been observed.

Having said that, it solves some AE problems, and possibly has fewer problems than any other FE model.

Yes, it took me one glance at the picture: Look at the equator! How do you get from Ecuador to New Guinea on this "map"?

The same way you get from LA to Japan on the Monopole model: Travel Westwards.

In the Bi-Polar Model there are two poles. The magnetic field lines resemble something like the field lines of a bar magnet. Essentially something like this, but in three dimensions:

The compass aligns itself with the field lines and adjusts itself when one travels Westwards or Eastwards in the Northern or Southern Hemiplane to go around either the North or South poles.

Since the magnetic field lines in magnets wrap around and interconnect, none traveling out into space in an unconnected fashion, traveling North or South at any point will also take you to either the North or South Pole.

This is very similar to the Lambert azimuthal equal-area projection, discovered in 1772.

This accurately represents area in all regions of the sphere, but not anything else. Look particularly at Australia. Is it really that shape?

There will be the same problem with flight times that I mentioned in another thread. Lines of longitude, it is generally agreed, are straight, i.e. are the shortest distance between two points on the same longitude. But this projection makes for a 'quicker' route along the same line, which I don't believe is possible. However, could be a fertile area for FE research, collecting data, making measurements etc.

Yeah, bi-polar map really doesn't work.You can book direct flights from Los Angeles directly to both Sydney (14h) and Dubai (16h).On the bi-polar map as presented, the distance to Sydney would approximately double that of the distance to Dubai.

We can even travel between all these locations, nonstop:LA <> Dubai: 16 hour flightDubai <> Sydney: 14 hour flightSydney <> LA: 14 hour flightFor some reason, we can travel from LA to Sydney FASTER than from LA to Dubai, almost as though we are living on a globe where we can fly straight over the Pacific Ocean to get between Sydney and LA.

We also know that daytime can be at LA and Sydney at the same time, while EU and Africa is in the nighttime, which would be impossible with a sun on a bi-polar map.

The shape of all continents in the outer part of the bi-polar map are also extremely stretched to a point they do not in any way match their real shape.

Yes, it took me one glance at the picture: Look at the equator! How do you get from Ecuador to New Guinea on this "map"?

The same way you get from LA to Japan on the Monopole model: Travel Westwards.

In the Bi-Polar Model there are two poles. The magnetic field lines resemble something like the field lines of a bar magnet. Essentially something like this, but in three dimensions:

The compass aligns itself with the field lines and adjusts itself when one travels Westwards or Eastwards in the Northern or Southern Hemiplane to go around either the North or South poles.

Since the magnetic field lines in magnets wrap around and interconnect, none traveling out into space in an unconnected fashion, traveling North or South at any point will also take you to either the North or South Pole.

That won't work as you will just end up at the edge of the bipolar flat earth. Are you ignoring that? According to that map you would need to travel east, over Africa. A bit farther than reality would suggest - implying that map does not represent reality.

Also, lines of magnetic force are 3-dimensional. Nothing at all like the bendy lines on that horribly distorted flat earth map.

Here a quack, there a quack, everywhere a quack quack.

Quote from: Tom Bishop - Zetetic Council Member

The moon's orbital path has a diameter of 768,000 km. That is almost one million miles.

I’ve just realised this is the map which requires the famous ‘Pac man’ effect.

The point at 180oW lies at 9 o’clock at the opposite end of the equator to the point 180oE at 3 o’clock. So they must be about 40,000km apart. Yet they are the very same point on the earth’s surface! Likewise the point at 12 o’clock represents the very same point as the one at 6 o’clock. In fact, every point on the circumference of the map represents the very same point as the one diametrically opposite. 4 o’clock=10 o’clock and so on.See also here.

I’ve just realised this is the map which requires the famous ‘Pac man’ effect.

... In fact, every point on the circumference of the map represents the very same point as the one diametrically opposite. 4 o’clock=10 o’clock and so on.

It's not every point on the circumference represents it's counterpart on the opposite side.ALL points on the circumference of this map are the very same point 00°N 180°W, the "anti vernal point".

This is a common problem with all flat map projections I've seen so far, there is at least one singularity [math.] on the chart.On the unipolar flat earth map it's the south pole: All points on the circumference are the south pole.On a Mercator projection you even have two singularities, the top and bottom end, the North and the South pole.

BTW. both models presented, the bipolar and unipolar map, are the same Azimuthal projection, only with different center points, the North pole 90°N 000°E and the vernal point 00°N 000°E

You are right, and that is extraordinary. Every single point on the circumference of the bipolar map is a different point on the map, but the same point in reality. My head explodes. So the earth cannot possibly be like that.

It really does make one stop on ponder the kind of brain that just accepts this sort of incredible inconsistency. In real science something like this would never be allowed to see the light of day. The obvious flaws with the Bi-polar model make it useless for any purpose at all - yet it is presented by one of the leading authors of the wiki here as a viable 'solution'. In reality the distance between Puerto Villamil, Equador and Quito, Equador is a mere 1,391 km. A trip often taken by visitors to the Galapagos. However, on that hideous and intellectually insulting abomination the closest distance is eastward, across Africa for a distance of 38,684 km.

No, I just blew that one...

Lets try again...

In reality the shortest distance between Pinogu and Quito is 17,568 km west. However, on that hideous and intellectually insulting abomination it is 22,507 km east over Africa. I'm not sure if you could even get there by traveling west as Quito is just below the equator and Pinogu is just above. If you could it looks like the distance would be around 80,000 km.

« Last Edit: July 21, 2018, 02:27:15 PM by BillO »

Here a quack, there a quack, everywhere a quack quack.

Quote from: Tom Bishop - Zetetic Council Member

The moon's orbital path has a diameter of 768,000 km. That is almost one million miles.

Tom’s silly caveat to this issue is that although this is a viable map, no one is sure of the actual orientation of the continents under such a model.

The monopole flat Earth is ridiculous and obviously wrong, but the bipolar model manages to be far worse. The idea of the ice wall has at least the advantage that most people can't go to Antarctica and the South Pole. The bipolar model just produces the ancient water pouring over the edge model, and has distances and directions even more at odds with everyday experience.

I note that the map is for illustrative purposes only and that the real map does not exist and in fact, cannot exist. There will be no flat Earth map reflecting the distances and directions that we experience because when a model is produced that incorporates them, it forms a sphere.